Last post on Nov 24, 2009 at 11:53 AM
You are in the Acura RDX
What is this discussion about?
Acura RDX, BMW X3, Car Buying, SUV
#147 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [hoodmobil]
Oct 21, 2006 (3:51 pm)
I'm a big BMW fan. I leased a 2001 BMW 540i for three years, loved the car, zero problems. I've been driving an Acura RDX for three weeks now. All this talk about rear biased vs. front biased AWD: on the Acura SH-AWD system, don't worry about it. The RDX feels as if it's carved from a single piece of aluminum billet, the handling is UNREAL. I personally prefer the Acura interior/ergonomics to BMWs (I have a 2004 TL as well). Very subjective. The handling of the RDX is nothing short of astonishing. Read the magazine road tests, which essentially confirm my observations.
What's not subjective is the price. I paid $33k for a base RDX. Amazing car. A bargain in my view. The X3? A tad more cargo room, but otherwise similar in interior space. Worth an extra $5-$8K? It's your dough. I have two Acura cars and a Honda motorcycle in my garage. Very happy. This from a guy who drove nothing but European cars (BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, Saab, Volvo) for the better part of 20 years.
So spend the extra money. You'll get a BMW, but you won't get Honda reliability.
#148 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [patentcad1]
Oct 21, 2006 (4:58 pm)
Yes, you've made a wise choice, but the big question is, can you beat an M5 around a racetrack?
#149 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [bodble2]
Oct 21, 2006 (5:55 pm)
>>but the big question is, can you beat an M5 around a racetrack? << Why would I ever be on a racetrack? I race bicycles not cars. Though racing cars might be a bit safer : ). BMW doesn't have to 'consider being afraid' of cars like the RDX. They're BMW already. They sell half their cars on the sheer mojo of the little badge on the hood. Plus they're lovely cars - overpriced or not. And they're not overpriced if car weenies will pay for them. I personally think the X3 isn't nearly as nice as the RDX - and costs more. But that's quite subjective. And if your X3 makes you happy that's sort of all that matters.
#150 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [patentcad1]
Oct 21, 2006 (8:36 pm)
Don't mind me, my friend. That was just a bit of an "inside joke". There was a bit of a "discussion" earlier on one of these X3 topics (I don't even remember which one. May even have been this one), where someone commented that an X3 can beat an M5 around a track, or something to that effect.
I wasn't trying to imply anything negative about the RDX. It's a nice rig. I don't have one, nor an X3, yet, although I admit I do have a fondness for anything BMW. I currently drive a TL.
Happy motoring with the RDX!
#151 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [bodble2]
Oct 22, 2006 (2:38 pm)
Let me paraphrase something my buddy the bicycle shop owner said about high end racing bikes: 'Once you get over $3000, none of it sucks.'
Same thing for cars over $30K for the most part, BMW's and Acuras included.
#152 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [patentcad1]
Oct 24, 2006 (4:51 pm)
I'm a big BMW fan. I leased a 2001 BMW 540i for three years, loved the car, zero problems. I've been driving an Acura RDX for three weeks now. ... The X3? ... Worth an extra $5-$8K? It's your dough. ... So spend the extra money. You'll get a BMW, but you won't get Honda reliability.
I'm a little unclear on why you'd give the edge to "Honda reliability" when you say your BMW had "zero problems" during your three-year lease.
If anything, based on my own BMW/Acura experience, I'd lean towards BMW. My X3 has required no unscheduled maintenance during its first year. My TSX, in contrast, spent weeks in the shop during its first year with two MAJOR safety problems: a driver's seat that slid during normal braking, and a seatbelt that would neither extend nor retract.
Your experience and my experience are but a small sample, but neither suggests that Acura has a reliability edge, especially when the RDX is in its first year of production.
#153 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [jrynn]
Oct 24, 2006 (5:21 pm)
I think, in general, both anecdotally, and documented, Honda/Acura is more reliable than BMW. But the fact the the RDX is in its first year, whereas the X3 is "matured" model may even things out somewhat.
#154 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [bodble2]
Oct 24, 2006 (7:13 pm)
I've owned Acura cars for the past 8 years and currently own an RSX-Type S, which I love but my lifestyle has changed. This past weekend, I went car shopping and test drove the Mazda CX-7, Acura RDX and the BMW X3, fully prepared to love the RDX. However, I was really disappointed in it -- I thought the back seat area was awkward to enter if you're a bit older, as I am, the navigation screen was hard for me to view without taking my eyes from the road for more than a second, and it didn't "wow" me. However, when I drove the BMW X3, I was totally wowed, even though it doesn't have all of the same standard features. When I priced out the RDX and X3 with my options, there was only about a $3K difference. I've gone ahead and ordered the X3, which I'm thrilled about.
The car I was impressed with for the money was the Mazda CX-7. I thought it offered several standard features that neither the RDX or X3 offered for a lot less money. I thought the navigation system was better than the RDX and it has a keyless entry and ignition. I thought that was cool. Plus, you release the rear seats with releases easy to get to from the back rather than on the seats themselves. I also thought the storage area in the back was better than the RDX.
#155 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [pammh]
Oct 24, 2006 (9:13 pm)
In my brief test drive of the RDX, I found the backseat fairly comfortable. But then again I'm not a big, tall person. However, I found the ride really stiff, almost uncomfortably so. I thought the turbo was kind of noisy, the power was good, but not exactly awe-inspiring. While it had lots of hi-tech toys, I thought it fell short in some of the luxury amenitie -- no seat memory, no power passenger seat, so-so leather quality.
I would be inclined to give up some of the tech toys (ie. nav, DVD audio) and opt for the X3 instead. (Not that the X3 doesn't offer a nav, but I would have to forgo it to keep the price down ).
#156 of 327 Re: BMW may want to consider being afraid. . . [bodble2]
Oct 25, 2006 (3:54 am)
I'm not concerned about a car's reliability while it's under warranty - I no longer lease cars. I buy them and KEEP them for 5-10 years. I want a car to deliver good reliability when it has 80-200K miles. And that's where Euro cars get stupid expensive compared to Hondas. Our Volvo was GREAT. Until it had 130,000 miles. FIVE THOUSAND BUCKS in relatively minor repairs over the last 18 months (30K miles) we owned the car. Never again.
If you lease your cars or keep them for <4-5 years: great, get a BMW. If you're in my position that's not a viable option. Too expensive to keep them on the friggin road. What's this based on? An overwhelming amount of anecdotal stories like 'I drove my Honda 200K miles and all I did was change the oil'. They simply do NOT BREAK as frequently as the Euro cars. And when they do they're cheaper to repair. I have a kid to put through college in a few years. I need the money for that. Not for $1200 air conditioning condensers in Volvos or BMWs. The Volvo A/C took a crap with 150K miles. Ever hear of a Honda or Toyota needing that part? Yeah, right, me neither.